MSF donations

You are here

Evaluation Reports

Some evaluation reports are public and can be downloaded from this website, while others are restricted to MSF users and can only be accessed via Tukul. This limitation is mainly due to the sensitive nature of the operational contexts and the resulting content. However, there are internal discussions about making all evaluation reports publicly searchable. If you are an MSF association member, reports are made available on various associate platforms such as www.insideOCB.com.

The objective of this lessons learnt exercise was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the UNITAID grant governance and management model for project achievements in terms of medical (and related) outcomes, strategic decisions, the potential for collaboration between multiple MSF entities and to leverage the learnings for replication in future projects. The exercise showed that the project directly delivered a new, more effective, simpler and much cheaper treatment to patients across seven countries.

This publication was produced at the request of MSF OCG, under the management of the Vienna Evaluation Unit. It was prepared independently by Hugues Juillerat, Sharon McClenaghan and Glenn O’Neil of TRAASS International.

In the last decade, while facing increasingly complex “projects”, MSF-OCP has chosen to add means to improve its interventions. This results in the actual growth syndrome of MSF-OCP HQ departments, which is also significantly impacting country coordination (CC) set-ups and means. New scenarios should be tested, notably for mono-projects (to revise), the idea being to reduce CC set-ups whenever possible. Resources' analyses highlight the importance of competent persons to follow (coordinators & key positions), including PCs, with a clearer career path.

Through an analysis of the events that have marked MSF’s history since 2003, this series of case studies and historical accounts describes the evolution of MSF's humanitarian ambitions, the resistance to these ambitions and the political arrangements that overcame this resistance (or that failed to do so).

This review of operational choices and decisions in Pakistan was carried out in 2011 and has now been produced in a shorter summary version. The report provides a historical overview of OCB presence in the country and looks at the way that the operational strategy developed over time, both in response to the external factors but also as OCB used a number of strategies to create an operational space. Many of the findings remain valid today within Pakistan and also in similar missions. A full version of the report is available from Stockholm Evaluation Unit.

The purpose of this evaluation was to review the experience in needs assessment and response to displacement in open settings. For the evaluation process, six interventions were reviewed: MSF Operational Centre Geneva (OCG) interventions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (Haut-Uélé), Djibouti, Cameroon and Iraq; Operational Centre Brussels (OCB) interventions in South Africa and Pakistan; and partial review of Operational Centre Paris (OCP) experience in Pakistan.

The overall objective of the evaluation is to identify and describe factors and issues to consider when planning implementation or continuation of Remote Control Programmes (RCPs) as an alternative to cancelling Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) programme implementation in a particular region/ country.

2005 was marked by two major natural calamities, the tsunami waves in South East Asia and the earthquake in Kashmir, Pakistan. Both of them were followed by a large intervention of MSF. After the initial assessment, MSF Belgium concentrated his efforts on the district of Bagh. The report will focus on the first 3 months of the intervention. As only a few documents are available, it was requested to reconstitute a chronology of intervention. Secondly, when there was time available, a short description and appreciation of the interventions of the other MSF sections was asked.